WE caught a glimpse of the future yesterday when David Cameron came calling on Alex Salmond.

Two countries, two ministers – Prime and First – a courteous welcome and a deal called the Edinburgh Agreement. The meeting was between the leaders of two different countries on equal terms.

When Scotland becomes independent, such meetings and agreements will be commonplace.

The relationship between Scotland and England after independence will be a healthier one – close, naturally, but one in which Scotland has an equal voice and where there is mutual respect.

That respect can be seen in the terms of the deal signed yesterday.

In an important clause, both governments agree they will respect the verdict of the people in 2014.

If it is a yes vote, the London government must start negotiating the new partnership between Scotland and England in good faith.

It’s in everyone’s interests that such discussions are positive – just as the discussions leading up to the historic meeting were.

Already even the prospect of an independent nation has changed the way Scotland is treated by Westminster.

It was only in January that Mr Cameron hinted the London government would run its own referendum in Scotland and dictate the timing, the question and even who could vote. That intervention caused outrage, with thousands of people rushing to join the SNP in the space of a few weeks.

Mr Cameron quickly pulled back – despite some hotheads urging him to use London’s power to call a ‘snap’ referendum

We are in a much better place, as yesterday’s smiles and handshakes demonstrated clearly.

The referendum will be made in Scotland, with our own parliament passing the law to make it happen.

The SNP always made it clear they were open to putting a second question on the ballot paper, but the compromise means that will not now happen. The refusal of the unionist parties to put forward a second question means Scottish people have a clear choice.

We can stay with the union as it stands – with four per cent of the seats in Westminster, where all the big economic decisions are made.

Or we can grasp the opportunity offered by a yes vote. That’s an opportunity to make Scotland both fairer and more prosperous.

Recent figures from the UK’s Department of Work and Pensions, uncovered by MSP Linda Fabiani, found the gap between the highest and lowest earners grew by £237 per week between1997 and 2010, when Labour was in power.

The incomes of the poorest 10 per cent of households grew by just £24 per week under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. By contrast, the incomes of the top 10 per cent of households increased by 10 times that figure, going up from £897 to £1153 per week.

Scotland can do better. A yes vote in 2014 also offers a chance to make Scotland more prosperous.

Just this weekend a group of prominent business people, many of whom previously favoured more powers for the Scottish parliament, signed an open letter backing independence.

They wrote: “We believe that if our nation is to realise its full potential and if we are to deliver a fairer, more competitive and faster growing economy, Scotland’s parliament needs the full range of economic and social levers.

“In the absence of any clear statement from the other parties in the No campaign, the only choice that will result in the Scottish Parliament having the fiscal powers it so badly needs is to vote yes for independence.”

They included Jim McColl, Scotland’s most successful industrialist and Malcolm Fraser, who runs an architectural practice.

They have concluded, at this early stage, that there is no third option. A no vote is exactly that, a vote for nothing – no ambition and no progress for Scotland.

Yesterday was a historic day, but it was just a taster for a truly historic opportunity.